HYDERABAD: Hyderabad Com­m­issio­ner Qazi Shahid Pervez has expressed his displeasure and dissatisfaction over the manner in which a five-member team of the Sindh University is conducting its own inquiry into the mysterious death of Naila Rind.

“I have conveyed my displeasure to them [members of the SU inquiry team] and told them I am dissatisfied with the way they are conducting the inquiry,” the commissioner told Dawn after his visit to the university on Thursday. He argued that the SU inquiry committee had not finalised its terms of reference and scope of the inquiry, which were perquisite of any probe.

He noted that almost all committee members were seasoned professors and had done their PhDs. “But I was surprised that they don’t have the list of respondents and/or the objectives before them,” he said.

“It appears that the team members have started it quite casually ... unfortunately they have not followed procedure,” he observed.

In reply to a question, Mr Pervez said that he visited SU in line with the provincial government’s policy.

“I will send my report to the chief minister,” he said, adding that he would also send his comments on the SU inquiry report, supposed to be submitted in the next few days.

The commissioner claimed that SU and Marvi hostel administrations did not have contact number of parents of those 1,600 girl students who stayed in hostels.

He said he told the SU inquiry team that it was a sensitive matter and no one would be allowed to sweep it under the carpet. “I still hope that the inquiry team will now set its direction to continue its work carefully,” he said, and claimed that the team members gave a positive response to his reservations when they were made known to them. “They said they will continue with their inquiry under my guidelines,” he said.

Later, the commissioner told journalists that the SU inquiry committee had wasted the last three days.

He said the committee should talk to the heirs of the deceased student and address their reservations, if any. He expressed his doubt over the university administration’s claim that no case of harassment was reported at the institution. He said it must be ascertained whether the SU harassment committee was actively working or it existed only on paper.

“It was also surprising to note that the committee’s convener was not present during my visit, for which the information was given two days ago. His absence shows his seriousness in this matter,” he remarked.

Published in Dawn, January 6th, 2017